nikolo5 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Good time everyone ! Resently I purchased sigma 10-20 and would like to share some simple test shots (100% crops) for yours opinions/comments. It was sunny day, handheld, outdoor, water on the news papers because it was windy :) Both are at 20mm of focal length, f/8, taken from a distance about 1.6 m, ISO 200, in aperture mode. Camera - Nikon D50. Sigma demonstrates a higher contrast, less barrel distortions, and also less CA, but Nikoan is also pretty fine as for kit.. Please, maybe you will make you own conclusions. For those who need I can send more crops.. Thank you. N.B.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikolo5 Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 here is another picture.. Sorry, a little bit different crops..<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan_hamilton Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 not sure of the point here, two different lens' with diff purpose. A cheap kit lens vs and (great) wide angle. They aren't even in the same range. Stop taking pictures of newspaper and get out and enjoy that 10-20, you're going to love it!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 If you are not going to use 10/19 range on the Sigma, why buy it? If you are, there is no substitute. Spend all the money on one good standard lens to start. That kit lens has a plastic mount and is held together with tape on the inside. It is a cheap $100 starter lens. Maybe you are a candidate for a prime 24 2.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Ronald, my sample must have really strong tape on the inside as the lenses have yet to fall out in the 1 year I have owned it. I will let you know when the plastic mount wears out. I just checked it and it still looks as good as new. I have both lenses and find both of them excellent. But I don't read newspapers in them. If you want to see the reason to own the Sigma in addition to the Nikon, take a picture at 18mm with the Nikon and then take the same shot with the Sigma at 10mm. 10mm is WIDE on a DX camera! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikolo5 Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 Ryan Hamilton: "not sure of the point here". Everything is comparable. I hope I will enjoy it outddor as u said. To Ronald Moravec: 17 cm is very useful for me too, thats the reason to buy sigma.. "Spend all the money on one good standard lens to start". I dont want to "start".. this is just a lens to get a wide range.. To Elliot Bernstein: "But I don't read newspapers in them" I dont read newspapers by lenses either.. what is this passage for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Nick, even 18mm is a wide angle on the DX sensor, but those lenses are not design for macro or such close focusing. In order to shoot a newspaper with a wide angle, you have to shoot from a close distance and IMO, that is not a valid test. Moreover, if you want to test it with a newspaper shot, you must tape the newspaper on a wall so that it is flat and your camera's sensor plane has to be parallel to the newspaper. That is not easy to align things. If you would like to compare those lenses at 18mm, I would shoot some identical distant subject such as a building at/near infinity. You can then compare little details such windows, signs, etc. on the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie_frank1 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Nick, reading newspaper from the lens is fun. The Sigma 10-20 has minimum focusing distance of 24cm. The Nikon 18-55 has minimum focusing distance of 28cm. How far away when you shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie_frank1 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Forgive my stupidity. What does it mean "100% crop"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Typically, 100% corp means you view an image at 100% in PhotoShop; that is at the pixel level, and then you crop out a small, representative area to show the detail and sharpness. If you don't crop it, you would be showing the entire image at 100%. That takes up a lot of disk space and bandwidth over the web, because you are including a lot of the areas that are unnecessary for determining sharpness. See the surfer image I showed in the following thread as an example: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JztC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie_frank1 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Shun, "100% crop" doesn't tell the magnification or zoom in how much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 i agree with the other posters, this is kind of a pointless test. a much better test would be of an outdoor landscape, shot at the widest settings on each lens, with the aperture at f/8-f/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaglow Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Another thing I would point out is that the 18-55mm lens ins fairly well known as a crappy lens, and I would confirm that having owned one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now